Archive
Vancouver: A downtown designed as if people belong
_
Downtown civility
I posted an image a day when I was in Seattle and Vancouver for two weeks (almost). The image below is one that I first over-looked when scanning the thumbnails on the go on an iPad, but after uploading the files to the desktop this week it really jumps out to me.
Click for larger version
It’s of an intersection in the middle of downtown Vancouver (Hornby St. & Robson St.) and it speaks to me because almost all of the elements of intentional and inclusive design are represented. As expected, it’s a space dominated by people. I’m not a fan of Vancouver’s one-way streets, because they facilitate high automobile speeds and add to noise pollution, but in general this is what a downtown complete street looks like. Everyone seems comfortable. Everyone feels they belong. It’s no wonder it is consistently ranked as one of the world’s most livable cities (NatPost).
I’ll be using some of the other images from the trip in future posts, but I’ve also posted a selection on the MyWHaT Flickr account at the following links for readers who are interested in perusing.
_
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
You are what you measure
_
Counting traffic
2-3 pm May 15 on the Fremont Bridge, Seattle Washington.
A friend likes to say, you are what you measure. She also typically attaches a warning to it, “so be careful.”
If we only measure cars, we will only get cars. Instead, what else can we measure?
The instant feedback counter (above) in Seattle went mainly unnoticed by daily commuters, but a high number of people, both people on foot and on bike (it only counts the latter) did take notice; they smiled when the count went up…then up again.
40 second clip of rush hour
I never made it down to the bridge at midnight to check the final number. My guess is it approaches 6,000.
For the record, on my ten-day trip to Seattle and Vancouver I spent a lot of time walking, a bit on bike, some critical connections made by bus, and some necessary car riding, mostly to visit a friend outside of the city, but also a taxi or two.
- Walk: 53 miles *
- Bike: 56 miles
- Bus: 202 miles (Includes ride from Seattle to Vancouver)
- Car: 81 miles
- Train: 165 miles (Includes ride from Vancouver to Seattle)
- Ferry: 12 miles
* An equation needs to be developed for walking miles in major urban centers vs. more rural settings. For each mile walked in a city, there are so many offerings for the senses, interactions, opportunities, and general input that one mile in the city is easily equal to one and half miles, if not more. It’s a thought. Anyone have a better exchange rate?
__
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
A little paint provides a DIY connection
_
Proceed with caution
A MyWHaT reader sent this image of a DIY bike lane on Bunker Hill Rd. in Acme Township.
The corner (map) is a particularly unfriendly one with high speeds, no shoulders, and blind spots further down the hill. Yet, Bunker Hill Rd. is the only connection from the TART Trail at the bottom of Bunker Hill and the Vasa Trail off of Bartlett Rd. In addition, the just over a half-mile stretch connects nearly a hundred homes to several local businesses (i.e. a hardware store, convenience store, post office) at the bottom.
From this vantage point, it looks pretty good.
It’s my first day back from a two-week trip, so that’s about all the comment I can muster. I gave up riding to the Vasa Trail from here long ago because of this section of Bunker Hill. I might have to take a spin to check this out.
What say you? Look good? Needed?
_
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
Re: Images and comment on Garfield Ave.
_
Talking the walk
The City’s counts for vehicles per day is around 15,000 for Garfield Ave. A road conversion is well within range (FHWA) if the City wants it as VPD is only a single factor, yet still in the sweet spot.
At issue, yesterday’s depiction of Garfield Ave.
From Brian, are tree lawns for cars or trees?
Unbelievable. Just a week or so ago there was a story in the news about the folks and tree service who were heavily fined for cutting a tree in the city right of way on State Street (RE). Thousands of dollars for one incident. I’m not saying that it was OK, and it made a strong statement about what happens to people who take private actions on public property….Now I look at these photos and see PERMANENT PARKING LOTS on public right of way!!! What kind of sick double standard is that? How many trees could those areas be supporting in “tree city” if there was even an opportunity to plant them? It sure would be nice for someone to take the time to investigate the permitting of these parking areas (or lack thereof) and determine if we’ve been giving away public property for crappy strip mall development while we’re fining people for touching it elsewhere without a permit….
A reminder from Richard, it’s not just Garfield Ave., but adjacent side-streets as well:
Right on! I work on Hastings Road, 1 block east of Garfield. I bike the route you walked fairly regularly, what a pain dodging cars parked at the dealerships, figuring out how to taverse ditches, landscaping, etc. Sidewalks are sparse along Hastings as well, a hardship for those on foot/wheelchair accessing Father Fred’s. In the winter it’s not unusual to see motorized wheelchairs traveling down the middle of Hastings road, since the right-of-way is buried in snowdrifts. I have been told that sidewalks are not required for leased properties, which are abundant along Hastings?
Another reader sees a related problem city-wide, parking across sidewalks:
Beyond doubt, ALL the traffic corridors, certainly within our city, require renewed attention and serious upgrading from the viewpoint of safe pedestrian circulation. But, as a long-time central city resident, allow me to widen the question a bit further. In those neighborhoods where sidewalks have been a long-established residential amenity the city has been and remains consistently lax in disallowing car parking which overhangs and obstructs the public sidewalk. (I can recall having to ask a neighbor, a TC police officer, to please cease from continually parking his own vehicle in a way that entirely blocked the sidewalk in front of his house.) There are communities where such offenses are subject to a citation. It’s time that Traverse City was among them.
Over on Facebook, fellow stroad buster Meika sees potential for expanding the transportation lexicon:
I think the phrase “sh*t hole” should be used more frequently in transportation circles. Chuck Marohn coined “STROAD”… maybe you could set the official definition of “sh*t hole.” It could be a photo contest!
And, from the devil advocate’s corner, our friend Mike Grant:
I don’t know that you’re making a specific policy prescription here (I suppose “retrofitting” could be a lot of things) but to the extent you’re talking about dramatically narrowing Garfield in a short period of time I think I would disagree that that would be a wise move….
My point is that if somehow Garfield could be shrunk so as to make car travel through there more difficult (again, this may not actually be your prescription, and I’m sure you would call for much more than that) I think that the current auto-oriented businesses would do much worse and I think it isn’t likely that ones that were more ped/bike/transit friendly would do much better, because there simply isn’t enough dense housing in that area to support many businesses that cater to people that live close by. Maybe Nesbit’s is an exception.
This is as opposed to, say, around where you live, where I think that there is enough density, as well as the infrastructure (sidewalks, narrower streets, zoning), such that if the City had the guts to slow 8th and add ped/bike/transit improvements then you would probably see more and more viable retail along there which catered to people in the neighborhood. I think where you live is similar in that regard to maybe Cass, Union, and West Front, where you’ve got an arterial running through a neighborhood that has density and some or all of that same infrastructure.
Not that it wouldn’t hurt to have this corridor planning document say we should put Garfield on a diet (maybe it does already, but I doubt it) but in the absence of that sort of thing I put my hope in the increasing attraction and densifying of the downtown and its surroundings continuing to increase the car traffic to the point that folks in the surrounding neighborhoods say, hey, we need to provide more ped/bike/transit improvements and put some of these roads on a diet. And hopefully have that phenomenon then cascade out from the downtown to the surrounding neighborhoods. Of course, that’s not really what’s happened so far…
MG also misses wide open comments.
By the way, I miss you having the open posting on your blog where people could comment/thumbs up/thumbs down. This probably will not come as a shock to you considering I was maybe one of the biggest users/abusers of that system. But just saying…
We’re still in trial period for the new format, so thank you for the feedback.
For the record, for this mile section of Garfield Ave. my expectations are pretty low, despite the opportunity being so great. One thing you’ll notice in the images is a lack of cars. Where there are cars in the images, I had to wait for them. It really is an overbuilt corridor.
I’m concerned that the current make-up at the City lacks the efficacy to replace parking lots with sidewalks, let alone promote a significant road conversion…but trying to be hopeful.
Resource: Corridor Improvement Plan.
__
Use the comment section below or through this page to send us a message, on any subject, anytime, anyhow. Comments will be sent to author and potentially used in future posts. Please highlight whether you’d like you’re name published with your comment.
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
Walking Garfield Ave. makes me cranky
_
Whose ROW is this anyway?
On Monday, I took the opportunity to walk home along Garfield Ave. with camera in hand. The images in the slide show below really explain themselves. They show that Garfield Ave. is indeed a shit-hole an underperforming corridor with ample underused property with infrastructure devoted to the hey day of the automobile, for which the bill for its second life cycle is now due.
It is also a depressing place to have to walk. The sidewalks that are present are disconnected and often run into parking lots and parked cars like below.
This scene gave me pause, because I never really put it together before that the City has allowed the public right of way to be used for a private parking lot. It is happening throughout the Garfield Ave. corridor and, apparently, in several other places around the City. Somewhere in the history of the City, permission was granted or permission was assumed that granting the use of public space for a private parking lot was more important than providing connections for people on foot.
More and more I’m becoming comfortable with stating unequivocally that I’m a public space advocate. I know this about myself because when I see a scenario like this, where a private gain so egregiously encroaches onto public space, I get offended. I’m not sure there’s anything to be done, but I’d like my disappointment noted for the record.
More images as larger files on the MyWHaT Flickr page
Tally-Corridor-Ho
The condition and design of Garfield Ave. bothers me for a number of reasons. As one of the gateways into Traverse City, it’s an aesthetic and functional embarrassment and it doesn’t serve the adjacent residents as if they matter. The strip mall land use pattern underperforms economically and is highly inefficient, so when commissioners whine that we’re broke I want to hold up a giant poster of the land use they’ve supported over the last 30 years and…
The Planning Commission, on which I serve, identified Garfield Ave. for the Corridor Improvement Plan that the City has reviewed over the last 6 months. I had high hopes that this section of Garfield Ave. could be retrofitted, but after walking it this week, my hopes are a bit diminished. No fear, that shouldn’t stop me from trying and could just be the impact of exhaust and noise I took in while standing next to a stroad of cars going 40-50-mph for an hour.
Onward. Tally-Corridor-Ho. Welcome to Tree City.
__
Use the comment section below or through this page to send us a message, on any subject, anytime, anyhow. Comments will be sent to author and potentially used in future posts. Please highlight whether you’d like you’re name published with your comment.
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
Americans are driving fewer miles, are you?
_
Video Tuesday
The latest in the StreetFILMS Street Facts Series, Americans are driving less…and less.
Why? The Short Answer…(WaPo)
Costs, recession, transit, aging population, and young people valuing connections, not high-speed mobility…read, social media, urban living, networks, all have contributed to what some called peak driving (Economist), the point at which a society hits a peak, and begins descending the downward slope of the graph.
More Vehicle Miles Driven charts by Dough Short
This reality of a declining driving population, coupled with a fewer and fewer percentage of the under 30-year-old crowd even having a driver’s licence, even has car enthusiast sources like Motertrend running articles that question how we allocate transportation dollars. Quoting from an author of a report titled, Transportation and the New Generation (Frontier Group), Motortrend lays it all out:
Our lack of a coherent federal transportation policy and the notion of spending Federal Highway Trust Fund monies on mass transit rather than roads is an age-old political hot button. But the Trust Fund doesn’t cover 100 percent of new highway projects. New mass transit projects face strict approval processes, while new highways are easily approved.
In Northwest Lower Michigan, we’re still driving quite a bit. According to US-DOT numbers, many of us over 20,000 miles per year. Yet, we have our low-mile drivers as well and anyone who follows MyWHaT knows, we’re interested in reducing those miles more and more (if we could only get a sidewalk!).
_
Where are you? Are you driving less? Why?
_
__
Use the comment section below or through this page to send us a message, on any subject, anytime, anyhow. Comments will be sent to author and potentially used in future posts. Please highlight whether you’d like you’re name published with your comment.
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
Is your city’s sidewalk network half-full or half-empty?
_
We’re getting there…but how far?
-
I lean towards half (or more) empty, but every now-and-then I’m a bit more optimistic.
Traverse City’s Fair St. (More Walk Scoring here)
Monday ramble
Let’s acknowledge for a moment the fact that every car trip, even if assisted by a wheelchair, begins and ends with a walk. It is the most basic form of transportation and planning has typically downgraded its value, hence the situation above.
However, it isn’t simply the lack of a complete network of sidewalks that keeps us from seeing walking as a tangible transportation option. For one, we’re spread out and daily needs are often perceived out of reach by foot. Large lots, large parking lots, and segregated zoning contribute to this. We also have corridors that even with sidewalks are not comfortable places to find one’s self.
Biking could be an excellent option to fill the walking gaps in Traverse City, but there’s a long-way to go to fix some critical disconnects that would make it compelling enough for the “interested but concerned” to regularly choose a bike over a car. Transit has financial restraints to being a service that is there when you need it without a thought (it’s improving).
Optimistically, regardless of one’s outlook of the network’s capacity, an advantage Traverse City has is that we are a small, active town with people with a lot of desire to see something better than sidewalks to nowhere like above. We could increase walking by simply increasing the sidewalk coverage in the City at a faster pace than the current half-mile or so a year.
Traverse City’s Planning Commission is currently undertaking an Active Transportation Plan* to provide guidance and some umph to complete some of these capacity gaps.
Yesterday, I caught the following list of rules-of-thumb for a transportation plan the blog Stroad to Boulevard is covering:
- Modal choice is induced by the built environment; it is not an intrinsic personal trait.
- The best transportation plan is a land use plan.
- Make sure roads are roads, and streets are streets.
- Focus on intersections.
- Safer streets do not require expensive infrastructure.
- In transit, frequency is freedom.
- Think of cyclists as pedestrians with wheels.
Although these are for a comprehensive transportation plan, I think the rules follow for sub-plans like TC’s Active Transportation Plan. In particular, it makes loud and clear that it’s the built environment that largely drives how we get around.
What do you think? Any other principles to add?
If you have any insights to share concerning walking, biking, or connecting to transit, that you’d like the Active Transportation Committee to aware of, please email the City Planner at “Russell A. Soyring” <RSoyring@traversecitymi.gov>. There will also be public presentations and interviews in the summer.
* In other communities, these are sometimes called a non-motorized plan. I serve on this committee as a member of the Planning Commission. An information page is online, including this work-in-progress inventory map.
__
Use the comment section below or through this page to send us a message, on any subject, anytime, anyhow. Comments will be sent to author and potentially used in future posts. Please highlight whether you’d like you’re name published with your comment.
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
Way-finding: An under appreciated aspect to bike friendliness
_
How far, how long
More Bike Love from Columbus, Ohio–Thanks MCoco.
Improved way-finding for cyclists, and people on foot, has been discussed at the Panning Commission during the recent corridor improvement discussions. Ideas like are the direction the City needs to head.
__
Use the comment section below or through this page to send us a message, on any subject, anytime, anyhow. Comments will be sent to author and potentially used in future posts. Please highlight whether you’d like you’re name published with your comment.
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
The Chatter: Cooperation around a vision can achieve so much…
ANNOUNCEMENT: Clinch Park Tunnel work began near the Farmer’s Market this week. Pedestrian and vehicular traffic is advised to seek alternative routes to Lot B until the project is complete on June 14.
REMINDER: Dinner & Bikes event with Elly Blue and Friends–Tickets available now! (If you aren’t in TC on May 5, the blog Traversing Tulip Lane is co-hosting the tour in Holland on May 3rd)
The Weekly Chatter
Bits of news, perspective, and what-not from the wider or the local world.
- Does your City encourage great infill with it’s vision? (Planetizen) TC Downtown deserves some credit (MyNorth)
- Does your state understand the economic value of bicycling? (MBPF) * Missouri Does…Here, we’re starting to get it (TCBN-2011).
- In light of the vortex of microplastics and toxins in the Great Lakes, green streets might be something we want to address (A-Cities) with fully-complete streets…Like the country’s best example of a complete street? (Phys.org)
Click to embiggen (smog eating asphalt!)
- Where are the 10 best Complete Street policies of 2012 (Smart Growth) and Chicago’s Complete Streets policy prioritizes pedestrians…Why? Because we are all pedestrians! (Chi-StreetsBLOG) (Chi-town is even raising some bike lanes!)
- The good news? To start it may not necessarily require anything beyond paint and planters (StroadtoBoulevard) and, perhaps, a bit of austerity for our most destructive means of mobility (capntransit).
- Certainly, we could come together on Neighborday and plant some trees (Good) April 27, Neighborday…It may reduce crime! (Discovery)
Tweet of the Week:
It's not at all surprising that 5 white, 50-something boomers (4 men) cannot fathom life w/o parking, but someone else should have a vote.—
Brian Davis (@briandavispdx) April 10, 2013
Yes! Play for everyone! (A-Cities)…
A giant, cooperative, multi-generational musical instrument:
from Daily Tous Les Jours
_
As always, More chatter at:
__
Send a message, we can take it.
_
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
Encouraged public comment on ADUs, park funding, and fat heads
_
MyWHaT comments
First, the consideration to use money from Traverse City’s Brown Bridge Trust Fund for parkland improvements drew out one reader’s list of spot-on questions:
- Where is the money from the BB Fund currently being spent?
- Since the Fund’s inception, how much money has been spent?
- Are there alternative plans for the Fund’s use?
- Where are the “greatest needs” in the City’s current budget? (Or what will people in the general public say the “greatest needs” are?)
- Does the City have a prioritized Capital Improvement Plan for its parks? (What are the costs per park or per priority to get things done that will have an impact on neighborhood?)
- How will projects be selected/investment decisions made?
If I am a voter, I am going to want to see something tangible (like a suite of projects/investments) to react to.
I’d add a couple more: How will the City measure success? What are the goals?
There is disagreement on the path forward (RE) on the City Commission, so there is a chance these questions will be answered–however slight. The next time they will discuss the issue is at the May 6 meeting.
Yesterday’s channelling of The Fonz to discuss the benefits of ADUs/Fonzie Flats, drew support and a bit of criticism for the City’s draft ordinance (Available in this March 25th packet-PDF).
Ayyyy! You’re right on with this Gary. We want to keep the character of Traverse City as much as we can and make it possible for young folks to stay here.
A comment from a young parent highlights their personal struggle to find affordable housing in the City and how limited options push people to auto-dependent places:
I moved to Traverse City in March. I work full-time, making $32,000 a year. For now, I am the sole income-earner for my family of four (wife, children ages 4 and 2) Because of the family size, we need a place with approximately 1,000 square feet. We have been told by a number of landlords we would not make good applicants because we have children…..Currently I am living in Williamsburg with my in-laws. The housing prices I have found in Traverse City are not conducive for young families and necessitate commuting by car. As much as you feel street design has contributed to the car-centric culture of TC, so to have the infamously high rental prices.
Rolf, who wrote a guest post recently about his struggles to build a tiny home, keyed in on a deficiency in the current ordinance that speaks to the above problem:
The proposed ordinance creates barriers to successful implementation..for example the 250 square foot per person requirement. The state of Michigan only requires 120 sf for a habitable dwelling and doesn’t set a limit on the number of people within that space. Granted this may not be practical for some or ideal for most, but why more than double the size? This forces a single person (perhaps a senior) with a 700 sf house to allocate 500 square feet of that house to accommodate a young couple to cohabitate; or a young couple with the same size house to build a 1,000 square foot addition on top of their garage to house another family with two children.
Finally, in response to a post last week about the City’s fat streets and the well documented benefits of road diets, one of MyWHaT’s biggest fans:
You need to get a life, get in your car and enjoy far away places too.! the only thing fat around here is your head-swell from being the self appointed anti-car czar.
Nice to hear from you too; you inspired me:
Use the comment section below or through this page to send us a message, on any subject, anytime, anyhow. Comments will be sent to author and potentially used in future posts. Please highlight whether you’d like you’re name published with your comment.
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed here are that of the author and do not represent the opinions of writers previously published here or any of the organizations, committees, commissions or other affiliation the authors may belong to, unless so stated.
